Re: Last Call: <status-change-ip-versions-5-8-9-to-historic-01.txt> (Moving IP versions 5, 8, and 9 to Historic) to Historic

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



If we are doing this, then I think that CATNIP (RFC1707) needs to be made
Historic at the same time, even though it didn't need an IP version number.

I also recall rumours that some people were actually using ST2 at one point.
Are we sure that it's totally gone away?

Regards
   Brian Carpenter

On 18/03/2016 08:15, The IESG wrote:
> 
> The IESG has received a request from the Internet Engineering Steering
> Group IETF (iesg) to consider the following document:
> - 'Moving IP versions 5, 8, and 9 to Historic'
>   <status-change-ip-versions-5-8-9-to-historic-01.txt> as Historic
> 
> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
> ietf@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2016-04-14. Exceptionally, comments may be
> sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please retain the
> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
> 
> The file can be obtained via
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/status-change-ip-versions-5-8-9-to-historic/
> 
> IESG discussion can be tracked via
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/status-change-ip-versions-5-8-9-to-historic/ballot/
> 
> 
> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
> 
> 
> 




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]